MovieChat Forums > Lethal Weapon 2 (1989) Discussion > Vorstedt should never have been revealed...

Vorstedt should never have been revealed as the killer.

posted 17 years ago by Mr-Fusion
36 replies | jump to latest

SPOILERS

Granted, this is not a universal opinion, but suddenly revealing Vorstedt (out of nowhere) to be the one to run Victoria Riggs off the road is an example of bad writing. I know Shane Black had a hand in the script, but I've also seen other names attached, so I don't know who's to blame. And it doesn't ruin a good movie for me, but it's certainly unnecessary.

It's obvious why they did this...they needed something to make Riggs snap and go ballistic on the bad guys. But it could've been handled a lot better than just coming up with this on the fly. All they had to do was build up the Riggs/Rika relationship a little but more, and that alone should've been enough to send Riggs over the edge and start killing people. Here was a fresh start at happiness for Riggs, and they snatch it right out from under him and kill an innocent woman.

The bad guys even proclaimed war on the police department! What more reason does Riggs need? His friends are dead!

It's the same thing that happened in Spider-Man 3. The Sandman was never even a glimmer in anyone's eye when the first movie was filmed and Ben Parker was murdered. The audience and Peter knew that Blondie killed Ben. That moment is what created Spider-Man. But wait! Peter, Blondie was just the other guy in the car. Sandman really pulled the trigger! Again, same reason. The writers are trying to come up with a reason for Spider-Man to go after The Sandman. "Well, let's see..... we could make him the murderer! All we'd need to do is refilm the crime scene but insert Thomas Haden Church, and BOOM! Now he's the killer, not Blondie!"

Things like this should never be rehashed to give motivation. Both movies had enough motivation to avoid a cheap shot like this.

-----
"Fuzzy wuzzy killer polar bears!"

[–] Kuato_and_George 11 years ago

I agree, but it didn't rub me the wrong way as much as Spiderman 3. We practically saw the guy kill Pete's Uncle for God's sake. Then they change it in the last movie? Weak.

For my latest movie reviews and news:http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

[–] ultimatenexus 11 years ago

When was this stated?! I've seen this movie numerous times (watching it NOW, even) and I seem to have missed that reveal every time. O_O

__________
Welcome to the middle of nowhere--the center of everywhere.

[–] RParmly-3 10 years ago

After they capture Riggs, they try to drown him by throwing him into the ocean. He and Vorstedt (the South Africans' top enforcer) have a little chat just before that, and that's when Vorstedt tells him.

Fichtre! Voila qu'on me tue mes morts.

[–] ultimatenexus 10 years ago

Having just watched it again I finally heard it. Strange how after all these viewings I never noticed that until someone pointed it out.

__________
Welcome to the middle of nowhere--the center of everywhere.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jcmgee 10 years ago

There was a suggestion over on the Lethal Weapon 3 boards some time ago that the "I killed Riggs' wife" twist should have been saved for that movie. It would've made the guy in that movie more menacing and nasty (the racism and killing Rika was plenty enough for the South Africans). I think it would've been a great idea, personally.

The only problem with that is that it would become repetitive to have Riggs avenging the death of loved ones in each film. Besides, I think the twist worked fine here and it gave LW 2 that extra bit of drama. Seeing Riggs revert back into crazy mode and avenge the death of his wife and girlfriend was just too good. This is the funniest, yet darkest film of the series in my opinion.

[–] manofsteel4455 10 years ago

yea, I don't understand everyone's complaint on this. Then again people complain about everything in movies today.

[–] buddyboy28 10 years ago

The only problem with that is that it would become repetitive to have Riggs avenging the death of loved ones in each film

They basically did that anyway. In LW3 Travis shoots Lorna and Riggs thinks he's killed her because he has cop killer bullets, and Riggs goes insane and kills him.

Lorna survived but they still pulled the same scenario they pulled here.

My life fades... the vision dims... all that remains are memories

[–] Lunchbox-3 8 years ago

I agree, even as a kid in the '80s I thought that was weak and unnecessary. This movie relies on too much coincidence. First that the guys Riggs & Murtaugh are chasing at the beginning of the movie turn out to be the same guys Leo is on the run from. They go straight from trying to find Leo's would-be assassin back to working on their original case, and they never even have an ah-ha moment "Hey, Leo's guys are the same guys we're after!"

Then to also have the guys they're chasing just happen to be the same guys who murdered Riggs' wife. If he had really murdered Mrs. Riggs wouldn't there have been evidence? He says he ran her off the road. Wouldn't the cars have traded some paint, etc.? It might have made sense if in the first movie, or at least in Riggs' speech to Trish earlier in LW2, he mentioned that it was a hit-and-run but they never caught the guy. We always thought it was an accident and suddenly it's a murder. They might as well have tacked on that Volstedt was also Riggs' long-lost brother. Y'know like with Bond and Blofeld in Spectre.

Then instead of killing Riggs, they put him in a straight jacket and throw him in the water. That would probably mean death for anyone else, but it just happens to be the one death-trap we already know Riggs can escape from! What a sheer bit of Hollywood luck that Riggs knew exactly how to escape from that, and only that, one specific trap. Do the writers think the audience is that dumb that they have to show us Riggs escaping from a straight jacket earlier in the movie? They could have had him dislocate his shoulder earlier, say in the car chase at the beginning and slam his shoulder against the wall to correct it. Later on he could escape from the straight jacket and we wouldn't know how he did it until he corrected it again with the ol' shoulder-against-the-wall. At least then there would be some suspense that Riggs might actually be in danger. As it stands, we know prior to him going in the water that he's going to be okay.

There was some good character moments and good action in this movie, but the contrivance level is high.

[–] simian_ninja 8 years ago

To be honest, I never expected it and for that reason alone I really liked it.

--------------------------------------
Death is the standard breach for a complex prize.

[–] donstuie 8 years ago

It definitely had a "Jack Napier killed Bruce Wayne's parents" vibe to it.